Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

China & North Korea Vs. South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and Philippines 2014

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • johns624
    replied
    Originally posted by Draco View Post
    Only an Idiot would have used obsolete 7" semihowitzers against BBs and CAs in the frontline, having BBs in the middle of nowhere. I never suggested tying the carriers to the BBs. I suggested either placing them hundreds of km WNW of Midway, to finish off the ships after the planes damage them or using them to defenmd Midway. Of course you wouldn't see that, you are always to busy nitpicking irrelevant details, so you can show off you knowledge of trivia and minutia and your inability to see the strategy.

    The Japs had good guns and planes in the frontline and as it moved they improved defenses accordingly, pretty smart. Nimitz sent all the junk to the frontline and kept huge amounts of the best stuff in Alaska, Hawaii, California, etc,
    If the Japanese were so awesome, why did they lose the war?
    I can almost understand Nazi fanbois, at least up to age 14. The Germans had some great equipment. Once you reach adolescence though, and learn about their atrocities and such, then it's gone.
    What I don't understand are Japanese fanbois. They didn't win a battle after the first six months, most of their equipment was junk and it was ugly, to boot.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Draco View Post
    As long as Vitenam is not attacked and maybe its claims are satisfied to dissuade it from fighting, Russia has a lot more to gain by trading with China and letting China expand east and south, than taking a belligerant position that severs relations with China.
    China is simply too powerful an economy to oppose. It has single handedly regulated the price of grain, metals, leather, cotton, lumber, etc, by purchasing enormous quantities at a low price and with good terms,which then causes scarcity and prices to go up for its competitors. It has single handedly bankrupted most of the clothing, shoe, etc, industries in the rest of the world and reduced the price of these items.
    If Russia continues providing oil, gas, etc, to China during the war (as Stalin did with Hitler), it has a lot more to gain that if it opposed China. The same goes for the US.
    Americans were were not willing to fight weak China in 1951 (as Mac Arthur suggested), they are less belligerant now and China much stronger. In the depression, would they really start WW II over distant countries?

    Russia has far more to gain by siding with the West and the various powers lined up against China in what would become a World War with China facing off against everybody else.
    In that scenario Russia would see the chance to expand into Manchuria. Since EVERYBODY is now opposed to China. The various Asian nations would have every reason to oppose China. India, and even Pakistan would have reasons in this scenario.
    You engaged China in a naval war against all the naval powers of the region along with the US, India, Britain, etc. With the loss of trade the Chinese economy would suffer a major blow.
    In the end China loses and suffers a major economic setback.

    Leave a comment:


  • Draco
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    So? The most common coast defense gun in Japan was the 28cm howitzer manufactured in 1890. It didn't even have a recoil system it was so primitive. On Saipan the coast defenses consisted of 4 pre-WW 1 Armstrong Whitworth 6" rifles until it became obvious to the Japanese military that the US would invade these islands and started doing something to strengthen their defense late in 1943.

    Admiral Pye's battleline of older US BB's was actually to the North of Hawaii during the Midway operation. They were independent of the carriers because they could only make about 18 knots at most as a group.
    The cruisers and destroyers with the carriers had AA batteries nearly equivalent to those of a battleship at the time and could maneuver with the carriers. Only an idiot would have tied the carriers to slow battleships.

    What made US carrier defense effective was a combination of technology and tactics. But, it was more the tactics than technology that did that.
    As I stated already, the US used carrier controlled intercept with radio and radar. The ring formation also made their AA fire far more effective.

    Both increased the distance from the carrier that engagement started and that in turn increased the time of engagement. In fact, studies by operations researchers showed that at distances of about 50 miles or more the CAP intercepting would result in near 100% loss of the attacking force.
    Thus, the CAP was put further and further from the carrier and controllers moved to cruisers and then destroyers.
    The Japanese at Midway were intercepting at 10 miles or less and had just minutes to work a strike. That resulted in few losses (and no, it has next to ZERO to do with a Zero's armament or ammunition) simply because the CAP had next to no time to attack the strike.
    By contrast, the US CAP intercepted Japanese strikes from the Soryu at between 40 and 60 miles from the Yorktown and produced roughly 70 to 90% losses among the strike aircraft. (and yes, the CAP tried to ignore the Zero escorts and not mix it up with them as the fighter escort was irrelevant to attacking the carrier).

    See Methods of Operations Research by Kimball and Morse for example.
    You might want to actually read some stuff on this as you have no idea what you are talking about right now.

    Only an Idiot would have used obsolete 7" semihowitzers against BBs and CAs in the frontline, having BBs in the middle of nowhere. I never suggested tying the carriers to the BBs. I suggested either placing them hundreds of km WNW of Midway, to finish off the ships after the planes damage them or using them to defenmd Midway. Of course you wouldn't see that, you are always to busy nitpicking irrelevant details, so you can show off you knowledge of trivia and minutia and your inability to see the strategy.

    The Japs had good guns and planes in the frontline and as it moved they improved defenses accordingly, pretty smart. Nimitz sent all the junk to the frontline and kept huge amounts of the best stuff in Alaska, Hawaii, California, etc,

    Leave a comment:


  • Draco
    replied
    Originally posted by Frtigern View Post
    India has a couple carriers yes, but I don't see how they need to get involved in this conflict whatsoever. Vietnam also sees China's demise as an opportunity to solidify its claims on the Paracel and Spratly Islands, possibly in conjunction with an alliance between Taiwan, Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei, as its China that has extended its Economic Exclusive Zone to include the whole damn South China Sea, regardless if other countries shores have a right to it by being much closer than Chinas. Again, I don't think Russia has much to gain by supporting China, if China decides to try and conquer all of East Asia. Russia knows the US is not going to sit idly by as its allies get attacked. Its there to preserve the status quo and keep the shipping lanes open and Russia will see China's recklessness as a threat to its economic prosperity. Russian vessels also transit Chinese waters too and trade with all other countries besides China.

    Whoever mentioned Denmark or Norway!? That was out of left field... Umm.. you're assuming China has just magically acquired Japan, the Philippines and Taiwan and that the world is sooo terrified of China, that its going to just let it take them? Yeah trade is important, but China also relies on the rest of the world to grow its economy. Its a double-edged sword that cuts both ways, as you said they import a lot of raw materials. The market will hurt for a while but those products that China produces and that we need can come from elsewhere. Russia doesn't absolutely need China. Russia needs Central Asia, Middle East, and Europe. Most of Russia's population is in the western part of the country, that borders the much more populated countries with a high demand for Russian fossil fuels.

    You forget that the generation that fought the North Koreans and Chinese is still alive and that the Koreans don't forget things easily. Yes the new generation is pampered and complacent, but all Korean males are still indoctrinated into the Korean army for a couple years and learn why they could be needed. And Koreans will RAGE when you threaten to end their way of life and live a life of toil in a concentration camp on just rice porridge, no phone, computer or internet. You also fail to mention that there is 24/7 surveillance on the North. A mass mobilization of troops up north would cause an instant alert of the South. There are around 120 M270 MLRS launchers in the South. If firing the right munitions they can wipe out 120 sq km of land area. Imagine that for a second and that's just the first volley. The ROK Air Force and Navy are also well equipped which would quickly doom the North's equivalents.

    As long as Vitenam is not attacked and maybe its claims are satisfied to dissuade it from fighting, Russia has a lot more to gain by trading with China and letting China expand east and south, than taking a belligerant position that severs relations with China.
    China is simply too powerful an economy to oppose. It has single handedly regulated the price of grain, metals, leather, cotton, lumber, etc, by purchasing enormous quantities at a low price and with good terms,which then causes scarcity and prices to go up for its competitors. It has single handedly bankrupted most of the clothing, shoe, etc, industries in the rest of the world and reduced the price of these items.
    If Russia continues providing oil, gas, etc, to China during the war (as Stalin did with Hitler), it has a lot more to gain that if it opposed China. The same goes for the US.
    Americans were were not willing to fight weak China in 1951 (as Mac Arthur suggested), they are less belligerant now and China much stronger. In the depression, would they really start WW II over distant countries?

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Draco View Post
    It's a good thing Nimitz didn't send any biplane bombers, bronze cannon or Gatlings to Midway.
    I think it is rather dumb to send all the junk planes and guns and pilots who haven't practiced dive bombing to the frontline, precisely where the largest armada in history is expected to attack and where there is precious little space to place only the best guns.
    The only old thing that would really have been of any use against the BBs and CAs is the repaired BBs, which were patrolling the US coast. They would have provided additional AAA and attracted some planes too.
    So? The most common coast defense gun in Japan was the 28cm howitzer manufactured in 1890. It didn't even have a recoil system it was so primitive. On Saipan the coast defenses consisted of 4 pre-WW 1 Armstrong Whitworth 6" rifles until it became obvious to the Japanese military that the US would invade these islands and started doing something to strengthen their defense late in 1943.

    Admiral Pye's battleline of older US BB's was actually to the North of Hawaii during the Midway operation. They were independent of the carriers because they could only make about 18 knots at most as a group.
    The cruisers and destroyers with the carriers had AA batteries nearly equivalent to those of a battleship at the time and could maneuver with the carriers. Only an idiot would have tied the carriers to slow battleships.

    What made US carrier defense effective was a combination of technology and tactics. But, it was more the tactics than technology that did that.
    As I stated already, the US used carrier controlled intercept with radio and radar. The ring formation also made their AA fire far more effective.

    Both increased the distance from the carrier that engagement started and that in turn increased the time of engagement. In fact, studies by operations researchers showed that at distances of about 50 miles or more the CAP intercepting would result in near 100% loss of the attacking force.
    Thus, the CAP was put further and further from the carrier and controllers moved to cruisers and then destroyers.
    The Japanese at Midway were intercepting at 10 miles or less and had just minutes to work a strike. That resulted in few losses (and no, it has next to ZERO to do with a Zero's armament or ammunition) simply because the CAP had next to no time to attack the strike.
    By contrast, the US CAP intercepted Japanese strikes from the Soryu at between 40 and 60 miles from the Yorktown and produced roughly 70 to 90% losses among the strike aircraft. (and yes, the CAP tried to ignore the Zero escorts and not mix it up with them as the fighter escort was irrelevant to attacking the carrier).

    See Methods of Operations Research by Kimball and Morse for example.
    You might want to actually read some stuff on this as you have no idea what you are talking about right now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Draco
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Because:

    A. They were surplus guns from old battleships.

    and

    B. They were available.

    Just remember, the Japanese defended many of their Mid-Pacific islands with SNLF battalions similar to a Marine defense battalion with crummier weapons and the US pounded those islands for days before invading with 5 to 10 times as many troops.
    Midway wasn't going to fall to the Japanese invasion force.
    It's a good thing Nimitz didn't send any biplane bombers, bronze cannon or Gatlings to Midway.
    I think it is rather dumb to send all the junk planes and guns and pilots who haven't practiced dive bombing to the frontline, precisely where the largest armada in history is expected to attack and where there is precious little space to place only the best guns and planes.
    The only old thing that would really have been of any use against the BBs and CAs is the repaired BBs, which were patrolling the US coast. They would have provided additional AAA and attracted some planes too.

    Leave a comment:


  • Draco
    replied
    Originally posted by johns624 View Post
    Nimitz knew that the day of the battleship was over. Coral Sea taught him that it was going to be a carrier war. Some people, 70 years later, still haven't figured that out.
    The BBs were the only think that could have faced the Yamato, etc, had they approached Midway in front of the carriers, covered by carrier planes.

    A BB near Midway would have drawn some planes or shells away from Midway (whether is be bombed or shelled)

    If he thought that they were useless, it was rather stupid wasting a lot of urgently needed resources repairing them

    Leave a comment:


  • Frtigern
    replied
    Originally posted by Draco View Post
    India has carriers that could help the Philippines and can bomb China. Vietnam knows that China's army is completely different from the army that invaded Vietnam.
    I doubt that Vietnam, India, Indonesia or Malaya will risk war with China to help the Philippines, especially Vietnam, given its location (well within rocket and bomber range) and its friendship with Russia.

    I don't think Denmark, Norway, etc, can retaliate very strongly, especially if China acquires Japan, the Philippines and Taiwan, the world needs that trade and industry and those sea routes.
    China has been buying an increasing percentage of world production of minerals, metals, food, wood, cotton, oil, etc, and supplying much of the clothing, tooling and equipment of the world. Few countries could afford to sever abruptly trade with China and those who don't will do rather well. Russia would certainly benefit trading with China, if the rest of the world doesn't.

    Young Koreans are a different world form 1950, on both sides. While the North is ready to sacrifice millions to take the South, Suuth Koreans may rather be red than dead when the invasion tidal wave comes.
    India has a couple carriers yes, but I don't see how they need to get involved in this conflict whatsoever. Vietnam also sees China's demise as an opportunity to solidify its claims on the Paracel and Spratly Islands, possibly in conjunction with an alliance between Taiwan, Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei, as its China that has extended its Economic Exclusive Zone to include the whole damn South China Sea, regardless if other countries shores have a right to it by being much closer than Chinas. Again, I don't think Russia has much to gain by supporting China, if China decides to try and conquer all of East Asia. Russia knows the US is not going to sit idly by as its allies get attacked. Its there to preserve the status quo and keep the shipping lanes open and Russia will see China's recklessness as a threat to its economic prosperity. Russian vessels also transit Chinese waters too and trade with all other countries besides China.

    Whoever mentioned Denmark or Norway!? That was out of left field... Umm.. you're assuming China has just magically acquired Japan, the Philippines and Taiwan and that the world is sooo terrified of China, that its going to just let it take them? Yeah trade is important, but China also relies on the rest of the world to grow its economy. Its a double-edged sword that cuts both ways, as you said they import a lot of raw materials. The market will hurt for a while but those products that China produces and that we need can come from elsewhere. Russia doesn't absolutely need China. Russia needs Central Asia, Middle East, and Europe. Most of Russia's population is in the western part of the country, that borders the much more populated countries with a high demand for Russian fossil fuels.

    You forget that the generation that fought the North Koreans and Chinese is still alive and that the Koreans don't forget things easily. Yes the new generation is pampered and complacent, but all Korean males are still indoctrinated into the Korean army for a couple years and learn why they could be needed. And Koreans will RAGE when you threaten to end their way of life and live a life of toil in a concentration camp on just rice porridge, no phone, computer or internet. You also fail to mention that there is 24/7 surveillance on the North. A mass mobilization of troops up north would cause an instant alert of the South. There are around 120 M270 MLRS launchers in the South. If firing the right munitions they can wipe out 120 sq km of land area. Imagine that for a second and that's just the first volley. The ROK Air Force and Navy are also well equipped which would quickly doom the North's equivalents.

    Leave a comment:


  • johns624
    replied
    Originally posted by Draco View Post
    Again, you're missing the point completely. Granted, my markmanship sucks, your's is awesome. Unfortunately, We´re not discussing my markmanship but whether a .30 cal is adequate to shoot planes and landing craft. In my opinion it isn't, in your's it is.
    I agree wiith those idiots who put thirteen .50 cal guns on a B-17, or 6 on a Hellcat and one on a Sherman, you obviously agree with the geniuses who put .30 cal guns on Spifires and Lancasters and 8 mm guns on King Tigers.
    I wonder why the marines bothered with the expensive .50s and having to keep 2 types of ammo, spares, etc, if the .30s were just as good.
    I mentioned that Murphy kept shooting after being shot with 8 mm bullets, but the Germans getting .50s obviously didn't.

    A .30 cal bullet slows down considerably after 12" in the water, a .50 retains quite a bit of punch. A .50 can easily go through 2 men and keeps killing
    Once again, and slower for the cognitively impaired---d i f f e r e n t g u n s s e r v e d i f f e r e n t p u r p o s e s.

    Leave a comment:


  • johns624
    replied
    Originally posted by Draco View Post
    Nimitz had repaired battleships, but did not send one to Midway, although he knew that he would face battleships there.
    Nimitz knew that the day of the battleship was over. Coral Sea taught him that it was going to be a carrier war. Some people, 70 years later, still haven't figured that out.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Draco View Post
    I was surprised to see that the four 7" guns in Midway were just 45 calibers long, so they have similar range to the six 5"/54 guns but have a lower rate of fire and are useless as AAA. Why have them? Even a long barrel 6" gun has longer range and a higher rate of fire.
    In contrast, the longer British 8" gun that the Japs installed in Wake had longer range.
    Because:

    A. They were surplus guns from old battleships.

    and

    B. They were available.

    Just remember, the Japanese defended many of their Mid-Pacific islands with SNLF battalions similar to a Marine defense battalion with crummier weapons and the US pounded those islands for days before invading with 5 to 10 times as many troops.
    Midway wasn't going to fall to the Japanese invasion force.

    Leave a comment:


  • Draco
    replied
    I was surprised to see that the four 7" guns in Midway were just 45 calibers long, so they have similar range to the six 5"/54 guns but have a lower rate of fire and are useless as AAA. Why have them? Even a long barrel 6" gun has longer range and a higher rate of fire.
    In contrast, the longer British 8" gun that the Japs installed in Wake had longer range.

    Leave a comment:


  • Draco
    replied
    Originally posted by johns624 View Post
    Wrong.
    1. There is a huge difference between a 150gr M80 and a 175gr M118LR. If you knew more about marksmanship than a typical keyboard ninja, you'd know.
    2. While an M2 BHMG may be better against hard targets, against personnel, I'd still take a M1919. It has a faster rate of fire, ammo is lighter, and it has all the killing power needed.
    Again, you're missing the point completely. Granted, my markmanship sucks, your's is awesome. Unfortunately, We´re not discussing my markmanship but whether a .30 cal is adequate to shoot planes and landing craft. In my opinion it isn't, in your's it is.
    I agree wiith those idiots who put thirteen .50 cal guns on a B-17, or 6 on a Hellcat and one on a Sherman, you obviously agree with the geniuses who put .30 cal guns on Spifires and Lancasters and 8 mm guns on King Tigers.
    I wonder why the marines bothered with the expensive .50s and having to keep 2 types of ammo, spares, etc, if the .30s were just as good.
    I mentioned that Murphy kept shooting after being shot with 8 mm bullets, but the Germans getting .50s obviously didn't.

    A .30 cal bullet slows down considerably after 12" in the water, a .50 retains quite a bit of punch. A .50 can easily go through 2 men and keeps killing
    Last edited by Draco; 01 Mar 14, 22:33.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by johns624 View Post
    Wrong.
    1. There is a huge difference between a 150gr M80 and a 175gr M118LR. If you knew more about marksmanship than a typical keyboard ninja, you'd know.
    2. While an M2 BHMG may be better against hard targets, against personnel, I'd still take a M1919. It has a faster rate of fire, ammo is lighter, and it has all the killing power needed.
    Maybe he's a Mall Ninja...

    http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

    Please, no beverages while reading that....

    Leave a comment:


  • johns624
    replied
    Originally posted by Draco View Post
    or whether a 150 gr bullet is better than a 175 gr bullet, etc, and fail completely to see the point, any man is better with a .50 cal MG than a .30 cal MG against planes, landing craft and troops in Midway. Dozens of 6" to 18" shooting for a long time cause a lot more damage than a few 4.7" guns shooting for a short while, while being shot by 5" coastal guns.
    Wrong.
    1. There is a huge difference between a 150gr M80 and a 175gr M118LR. If you knew more about marksmanship than a typical keyboard ninja, you'd know.
    2. While an M2 BHMG may be better against hard targets, against personnel, I'd still take a M1919. It has a faster rate of fire, ammo is lighter, and it has all the killing power needed.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X